Friday, September 18, 2015

Who or what is "NOM Staff" and who writes this crap?

There is a Gaythering Storm

As an employer National Organization for Marriage has never been a convocation of vibrant critical thinkers. The mediocre minds of former employees like Thomas Peters and Christopher Plante were at the radius of an intellectual black hole. Things seem to be going further downhill with a piece titled “Oregon Judge Faces Charges for Declining to Perform Same-sex ‘Wedding’ Ceremonies.” The post is attributed to NOM Staff. Who remains and what do they do all day?

There is a movement to attack and discharge all officials in the United States who refuse to violate their religious beliefs in order to instigate the erroneous Supreme Court ruling on marriage. As we saw with Kim Davis, the same-sex marriage agenda does not want tolerance or peaceful coexistence; they want to be able to control all societal aspects, from prosaic terminology to religious beliefs.

However, there are still those like Kim Davis who stand firm in the face of adversary and defend marriage. One such example is transpiring in Oregon.

This has the same beginning tone as the amusing 2009 NOM disaster titled “There is a Gathering Storm.” Aside from the false hyperbole about some nefarious movement “instigate” means to incite. Incite? Marriage equality is the law of the land — last time I checked. Moreover, substituting “same-sex marriage” for “homosexual” still leaves the “agenda” thing. Hackneyed at best. It's all so terribly unimaginative.

Referring to that idiotic county clerk in Kentucky is probably not a very good idea. About two-thirds of our citizenry thought that Davis should do her job. Americans might have been more sympathetic if Davis thought that her paycheck was less important than her odd definition of religious liberty.

As for that Oregon jurist, Judge Vance D. Day, of Oregon’s Marion County Circuit Court, has been accused by a judicial oversight committee of refusing to perform same sex-marriages. According to the committee he “inappropriately screened and ordered his court staff to screen wedding applicants to ensure that they were not same-sex” — something he has admitted to doing.

Perhaps the judge has a better case than Ms. Davis. That is in the difference between prohibiting deputies from using their authority in lieu of the clerk to process marriage licenses and prohibiting subordinates from scheduling same-sex weddings. Reasonably accommodating Ms. Davis was easy. Accommodating the judge, not so much. In any event, it is a reasonable line of inquiry. I started this paragraph with the word “perhaps.” I will wait to review the panel's findings and determination.

In NOM-world due uncertainty does not exist. Neither does reality. They will keep using those scare quotes around marriage and wedding as if same-sex marriages do not really exist. It is NOM's judgment that is imaginary. Those gay marriages are all quite real. There is a gathering storm for equality.